Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986: Project Licence Applications

Baroness Nicol: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to change the way they handle project licence applications under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We wish to announce changes in the way the Home Office handles certain types of project licence application made under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.
	The types of application in question are publicly recorded as being automatically referred to the Animal Procedures Committee (APC) for advice, before decisions are taken by or on behalf of the Secretary of State. For some types this is in accordance with pledges given when the 1986 Act was passing through Parliament, while others are referred through arrangements agreed subsequently. Details are set out in various APC annual reports laid before this House.
	The APC has recently been considering which applications should be referred to it in future, and the chairman has put a number of recommendations to us.
	The APC recommends that three types of application, on which it is currently committed to give advice, no longer need to be among those listed as routinely referred to it. First, it no longer sees value in considering applications to use terminally anaesthetised rats for microsurgery training, since such cases are few and usually raise no particularly difficult or contentious issues. Secondly, it now sees no point in including in the automatic referral category applications to test tobacco products, since the established policy and practice has long been not to license such testing. (Tobacco is used in licensed animal studies investigating diseases, but its use in such cases is not itself regarded as a reason for referral.) Thirdly, the requirement to refer applications to test finished cosmetic products and ingredients has been similarly overtaken, in that the industry has agreed to make no further applications for this purpose, as it is Home Office policy not to license it.
	We have accepted the APC's recommendations as regards all these types of applications. They will with immediate effect no longer be regarded as ones to be automatically referred or to be recorded in that category. This change will make no significant or practical difference, other than saving processing time in the microsurgery training cases and avoiding unproductive use of Home Office and APC resources.
	The APC has also recommended that it should continue its current practice of advising on all the other applications which are by agreement referred to it as a matter of course. These are applications to use wild caught non-human primates, and to use any non-human primates in scientific procedures of substantial severity. It also wishes to keep the requirement that it should offer advice on applications of any kind raising novel or controversial issues, or giving rise to serious concerns. Although there are relatively few of these applications, they are all of high or potentially high public concern. We fully accept that they should continue to be referred to the APC before licensing decisions are taken.
	Finally, the APC has indicated its view that it could usefully see other project licence applications, although it could consider only a very small number each year and is mindful of the need not to hold up unduly the processing of applications. Which additional applications it should be asked to advise on is a matter to be discussed further between the Home Office and the APC. Once that has been settled, we will make a further statement.

Asylum Reform

Baroness David: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they plan to publish the summary report on responses to the new legislative proposals on asylum reform.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: On 27 October 2003 the Home Secretary and the Lord Chancellor announced new legislative proposals for asylum reform. We wrote to a number of stakeholders outlining these proposals and inviting comments. Today we are publishing a summary report on the responses we received. Copies of this will be sent to those who responded to the letter as well as being placed in the House Library and on the IND website. We will also be placing copies of the race equality impact assessments of the provisions contained in the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc) Bill in the Library.

Charities

Lord Freyberg: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many charities there are in the United Kingdom; and how many of these are (a) incorporated trading and incorporated non-trading charities; and (b) unincorporated non-trading charities.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Charity Commission is the non-ministerial government department responsible for the registration and regulation of charities in England and Wales. There are currently 185,000 charities on the register. That figure includes charities and their subsidiaries. Not all charities are registered with the commission; some are not allowed to register (exempt charities) and others are excepted from the requirement to register.
	The commission has provided the table below, which details (a) the number of incorporated trading and incorporated non-trading charities; and (b) unincorporated non-trading charities. Those figures account for the charities with an established trading company.
	
		
			 Charities Trading Non-trading Total 
			 Incorporated 2,326 18,724 21,050 
			 Unincorporated 1,973 141,717 143,690 
			 Total 4,299 160,441  
			 Total main charities (not including subsidiary charities) 164,740   
		
	
	In Scotland the Scottish Charities Index is maintained by the Inland Revenue. Around 28,000 charities are currently on the index although many of these are not active. Details of whether charities are trading or non-trading are not held.
	There is no register of charities in Northern Ireland. Northern Irish charities wishing to claim charitable tax exemptions apply to the Inland Revenue. Approximately 3,700 Northern Irish charities have made claims over the four years to March 2003. Details of whether charities are trading or non-trading are not held.

Transpennine Rail Services:Blackpool-Scarborough

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether through trains will continue to run between Scarborough, York, Leeds, Burnley Manchester Road, Preston and Blackpool following the introduction of the new Transpennine franchise on 1 February 2004.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Through services between Blackpool and Scarborough will cease in December 2004. Transpennine will operate services from Scarborough to Leeds (and Liverpool) and the Strategic Rail Authority's intention is that the new northern franchise will operate services from Leeds to Blackpool, 70 per cent of which will be extended to York.

Pension Credit

Baroness Greengross: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What would be the cost in 2003–04 if the deemed income from capital for the pension credit was £1 per £1,000 of savings.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The additional cost of pension credit in 2003–04 if deemed income from capital was £1 per £1,000 of savings is estimated to be £110 million.
	Pension credit was introduced in October 2003. If it had been introduced for the full year of 2003–04, the additional cost of this change would have been about £210 million.
	Notes:
	1. Figure is rounded to the nearest £10 million.
	2. Estimates relate to the year 2003–04.

Company Law Reform

Lord Wedderburn of Charlton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they intend to legislate on the duties of skill and care of the directors of public companies; and, if so, whether Parliament will be afforded the opportunity to debate and amend the proposals which the Government intend to make.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government remain firmly committed to major company law reform building on the recommendations of the Company Law Review. Such reform will include statutory principles by which directors are bound, including on care, skill and diligence.
	The Government have made it clear that they want the process of company law reform to be fully consultative. We welcomed the scrutiny by the Trade and Industry Committee of our proposals in the last Session, and intend to publish a draft of a Bill for comment.

Equal Pay Act 1970

Viscount Astor: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, under the provisions of the Equal Pay Act 1970, benefits such as free accommodation can be taken into account in determining equal pay.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Under the Equal Pay Act 1970, contractual benefits such as free accommodation can be taken into account in determining equal pay. The Equal Pay Act applies to all terms of the contract of employment (whether concerned with pay or not). The Sex Discrimination Act 1975 prohibits sex discrimination in relation to non-contractual benefits provided by an employer.

Equal Pay Act 1970

Viscount Astor: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, under the provisions of the Equal Pay Act 1970, benefits other than free accommodation can be taken into account in determining equal pay.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Under the Equal Pay Act, any benefits that are provided in accordance with the contract of employment can be taken into account in determining equal pay. The Equal Pay Act gives men and women in the same employment doing equal work the right to equality in all terms of their contract of employment. This means that even though a man and a woman are receiving the same basic rate of pay, there may still be a breach of the Equal Pay Act if other contractual benefits (such as a company car, holidays, private health care etc) are not provided on an equal basis. The right to equality does not apply where the difference in the terms is due to a material reason other than the difference of sex.

Patent Infringements

Lord Taylor of Warwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans they have to protect entrepreneurs from the increasing problem of patent infringement.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The Government have no evidence to suggest that the problem is increasing, but we are taking a number of steps to try to help people enforce their intellectual property rights.
	We are working with the courts to bear down on the costs of litigation, and the Patents County Court in particular has a streamlined procedure which enables patent rights holders to take speedy action against infringers. The courts are also encouraging parties to use alternative methods of resolving disputes.
	The Patent Office is presently investigating the feasibility of setting up a body which could assist businesses whose patent rights are infringed by taking action on their behalf. More generally, I have recently received advice from the Intellectual Property Advisory Committee. It has completed a study of this problem and made a number of recommendations which I am considering. Its report can be viewed at: http://www.intellectual-property.gov.uk/ipac/pdf/enforce.pdf.